That sounds like a convenient cop out for you to complain about more irrelevant details but ok. Sorry to hear you won't attempt to finish anything.
If the judges are only interested in good designs, then framedrops shouldnt prevent a map from placing based on design. Cutting back objects isnt a skill worth grading maps over. I'll happily submit maps if i knew i wouldnt get knocked for framedrops. But i see no value in scaling back a design to make it playable when maps that are also unplayable can be adjusted. And yea im aware of the obvious difference between changing a weapon and adjusting performance, but neither of those are related to the level's design if we are separating them. There was nothing wrong with Oblivion's performance until 343 changed the rendering system, so i know you would at least understand my position.
As far as I can tell I am merely expressing that allowing for judging of maps without their weaponsets/native spawning by fixing the rules of the competition to allow this, explicitly stating that this is going to be taken into account for maps, if even necessary, is a good idea. It is a fair way to compensate for the ****ed nature of the sandbox - if you're a judge at a piano competition, do you DQ someone for missing a trill or fudging a single bass note? No! Do you DQ them if they skip part of the piece and start playing something else entirely? Yes! Because the point of the competition is judging the performance, the artistry - this is explicitly implied in the piano competition - something that allows for mistakes that might be editable if the competition relied on recorded submissions. Unfortunately, this is not explicitly implied or even stated in this competition, and there are easy ways to bend the rules (and then complain later) if they aren't explicitly stated. If the rules are not updated to allow for interpretive judging, then you end up putting yourself on a slippery slope into a very salty ocean. Explaining how these elements are going to be judged (writing up a and agreeing - judges only! - on a scale for how important certain things are) and then explaining this or putting a disclaimer in the bylaws is a good step. Another good thing to do would be to agree on what constitutes a 'MAP'. The rules, again, state that balance, fun, gameplay, spawning, are all being taken into account. How heavily? There is nothing that explains this, as such one can assume that this category makes up 1/3 (there are 3 categories) of the score for a map. Is this really the case? Who knows, but: -if that is the case -if it is not explicit -if the judges are not explicitly given the right to futz around and judge with a slight degree of interpretation as to these elements -if there is a community that is chomping at the bit to find some reason to get righteously furious with one or all of the judges -if the definition of 'MAP' is in fact tied to all related gameplay, sandbox usage, etc as well as flow then you will just have another disaster on your hands and 'shitty' results when it's all over. As far as I can tell, there is a precedent. I don't want the judges to judge the way I'd judge. I am not a judge. I am just concerned that competitions fall apart if they aren't wrenched together tightly. Again, to make myself clear, this is not me wanting judges to judge in my way or my favor, or a criticism of the judges. This is a criticism of the structure of the competition itself, that if left unaddressed given how important interpretation is in anything that involves opinion and argumentation, and that has real world ramifications/results, will end in just another trashheap - I want the structure to be cohesive, because I want everyone to be EXPLICITLY operating within the same framework - i.e. a fair competition.
If we're compensating for Halo 5's shitty sandbox, then we may as well compensate for Halo 5's shitty remdering engine. In both cases, maps can be adjusted for the tournament thereafter. There was already a grace period suggested for performance issues. May as well remove the category from judging entirely if the most important thing is the actual design of the map.
Right, that's essentially what I'm saying - I realize how many problems and how many slippery slopes this allows for, which is why my main issue is that there is still no disclaimer or explicit guidelines that state how important certain things are, then you'll have people complaining all the way thru until Halo 6 comes out
Literal unplayable performance is one thing. Some frame drops aren't a big deal. I know full well this engine is dog